Their entire basis of preaching guilt over the consiousness angle was egotistic, overzealous and unproven.(either all plant matter and all animal matter are consious or they are all not. Therefore everyone, no matter what matter they consume to survive, remains guilty of ending a consiousness or not and therefore neither diet maintains the higher ethical ground to guilt from. I will not be convinced otherwise. And especially not while every white paper starts with defining consiousness is always in their own pure hubris)
It was not until it was called ‘Plant based’ that i got on board as that research is proven. yes: it is healthier, yes: less emmissions. yes: uses less matter to consume. yes: more sustainable. (Although not sustainable for those who remain unable to digest beans as a form of protien. but that is another story)
Ethical? in the form of ‘less matter’ one might try to argue but i would not use any guilt angle on ethical stance so long as any matter that may be argued to contain consiousness is consumed. No ethical stance starts with measuring anything in value as ‘less than’ another so long as it is used just to justify to find their own comfort to judge others from.
I am aiming for a vegan lifestyle, but it is difficult to escape hidden milk and eggs in unexpected places. I hope everyone can agree that factory farming is needlessly cruel and should not be supported. I am happy with any steps taken to reduce suffering in the world. I think too many people view it as all-or-nothing, and they can’t do all so they do nothing. But every choice we make affects the world we share; any individual can make a difference, even a small one, and they add up.
you know, empirical data was also used to determine that Africans and women didn’t have consciousness and were just mindless beasts.
perhaps in another 60-100 years we’ll have a better understanding of sentience and will determine that plants, being a different organism, lacks a brain or nervous system but has something comparable.
point is, just because youknow something today doesn’t mean it’s factually the truth.
instead of basing decisions on your diet entirely from an emotional reaction, perhaps it’s best to determine your diet based on hard facts of nutritional value and environmental impact.
But I personally do it because we know animals feel fear and pain, and we do not know that about plants.
Why are you fighting in favor of needless slaughter? Fucking psychopaths here.
you seem to be in an emotional hysteria right now. so it’s natural that someone would think that you’re basing all your information on emotional triggers because you are arguing in an unstable emotional state.
go outside and touch grass, you need the downtime.
we’ll all be here waiting for you to call us names again once you’ve calmed down.
it’s natural that someone would think that you’re basing all your information on emotional triggers
Not if they know how to read. Evidence guides my choices, and then I get emotional because dumbfucks reject evidence so they can continue causing harm without guilt.
I eat meat and veg. you eat only veg. we both live completely different lives with completely different requirements and completely different perspectives.
in my perspective, I eat meat because I eat meat not sure why that’s something to get so emotional about and call me a psychopath.
As I stated before: you’re inserting your own hubris of what consious means as if we agree.
I don’t agree with your definition of consciousness.
This means we cannot have an honest conversation on what that means as we already disagree with what consiousness means.
This does not mean I disagree plant based is valid on the other arguments. Just not this one.
As i said: it is unethical to even suggest it’s a matter of judgement on ethics as you’ve already down graded something in order just to be comfortable to judge someone else on their ethics. A complete discard of plants from the equation is egotistical of yourself to even go there.
you revealled you are already unequipped with ethics to be arguing ethics.
I’m judgy of people that believe in chemtrails, and HAARP, and juice cleanses to treat cancer, too.
There is an objective world we can learn things about. People that reject that with “have an open mind, man” don’t deserve respect and their opinions are worth absolutely nothing.
in the conclusion, they explicitly allow for the possibility that it may be proven that plants are conscious.
Do they? Please provide a quote, I’m not seeing anything like that in the conclusion.
Here’s the other thing: even if you are correct (which is not likely based on evidence), consuming plants instead of meat still reduces suffering. Eating plants directly is more efficient than eating animals that eat plants.
even if you are correct (which is not likely based on evidence), consuming plants instead of meat still reduces suffering. Eating plants directly is more efficient than eating animals that eat plants.
this has nothing to do with what I e been saying at all, and I am correct, as you explained in your other comment
In conclusion, we feel we must speak forcefully: plant neurobiologists have become serial speculationists. The ratio of speculation to data in their oeuvre is astronomically high. If they want to form a sensible hypothesis and then test it with real experiments, that is fine, but the prolific speculating and fantasizing need to stop.
Consciousness is very poorly understood, because we don’t understand brains very well at all.
However, because we don’t know how it works, it’s possible that every system with chemical reactions, moving parts etc, might be conscious. It’s a bit of a mind fuck.
that’s the thing: no one knows. No one agrees. Not even vegans. It doesn’t stop them pushing out misinformation about it.
For all the facts we do actually have and agree on i could make just as many claims that there is consciousness as they claim there isn’t.
Meanwhile you have anti abortion claims that life starts at conception. This makes an assumption of when consciousness starts. Still not fact.
And scientists don’t want to be withheld from work on plants for the fear of ethics. (Yet they tear mice apart)They will go as far as make no effort of reference or crosscheck even on the discussion of consciousness(even shows in the above link at the bottom of the study) like they know so little they can’t even begin with reference that was ever agreed upon and burry any that contradict their hubris while making an assumption on consciousness.
All three of these groups are in constant contradiction depending on comfort level of ethics around consciousness. It’s like a shitty ballet around a non fact.
Vegans on the internet seem like a psy-op and full of trolls. The vegans I meet are rarely that fucking crazy.
The cost of meat has gotten so expensive over the past decade that they vegan/vegetarian alternative is so much cheaper. I’m not a vegan. I’m just not going to spend $40 for a chunk of steak.
Even at dinner parties, I make tofu/vegan stuff. I make chicken patties, spaghetti and meatballs, Asian stir fry… All using mock protein. I tell people and they’re convinced it’s good too.
It’s the same concept of people being assholes online, but applied to those belief structures. They are just taking the freedom that anonymity provides and acting like their true selves. They’re just too afraid to be such insufferable assholes in person because of the response they KNOW they would receive.
No ethical stance starts with measuring anything in value as ‘less than’ another so long as it is used just to justify to find their own comfort to judge others from.
That’s not what I’m doing. I’m going from the ground up. Based on all available evidence, plants do not feel fear or pain. Again, they have no brains. This information guides my choices, following my goal to reduce suffering in the world.
You’re the one thinking backwards. I never said they were “less than,” only that they lack consciousness. You’re pretending we should feel guilty for eating things that cannot think.
If you feel that strongly about it, stop consuming anything.
Kingdom phylum class species, do these words mean anything to you?
Jellyfish and starfish are animals, not plants. Not all things without brains are plants, but there are no plants with brains that we know of.
Jellyfish seemingly cannot feel pain and only have enough neurons to crudely sense their environment; I advocate against consuming any animals, but in terms of animal suffering it is probably less harmful to eat a jellyfish than a cow, chicken, pig, or even fish, which can feel pain.
My ethics include using scientifically acquired information to make the best choices we can. The fuck are you doing?
One thing: I absolutely hate vegan branding. Some things, I want it to TASTE like meat (like mock pork, or vegan nuggets).
Other things, I would rather it taste like a vegan version of it. Like tofurkey is not at all comparable to regular turkey. And any meat eater hoping to switch is going to be pissed.
Like no, this is a whole different meal man. Don’t get it twisted.
Veganism.
Their entire basis of preaching guilt over the consiousness angle was egotistic, overzealous and unproven.(either all plant matter and all animal matter are consious or they are all not. Therefore everyone, no matter what matter they consume to survive, remains guilty of ending a consiousness or not and therefore neither diet maintains the higher ethical ground to guilt from. I will not be convinced otherwise. And especially not while every white paper starts with defining consiousness is always in their own pure hubris)
It was not until it was called ‘Plant based’ that i got on board as that research is proven. yes: it is healthier, yes: less emmissions. yes: uses less matter to consume. yes: more sustainable. (Although not sustainable for those who remain unable to digest beans as a form of protien. but that is another story)
Ethical? in the form of ‘less matter’ one might try to argue but i would not use any guilt angle on ethical stance so long as any matter that may be argued to contain consiousness is consumed. No ethical stance starts with measuring anything in value as ‘less than’ another so long as it is used just to justify to find their own comfort to judge others from.
Plants do not have brains or nervous systems, they are not conscious.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8052213/
I am aiming for a vegan lifestyle, but it is difficult to escape hidden milk and eggs in unexpected places. I hope everyone can agree that factory farming is needlessly cruel and should not be supported. I am happy with any steps taken to reduce suffering in the world. I think too many people view it as all-or-nothing, and they can’t do all so they do nothing. But every choice we make affects the world we share; any individual can make a difference, even a small one, and they add up.
you know, empirical data was also used to determine that Africans and women didn’t have consciousness and were just mindless beasts.
perhaps in another 60-100 years we’ll have a better understanding of sentience and will determine that plants, being a different organism, lacks a brain or nervous system but has something comparable.
point is, just because you know something today doesn’t mean it’s factually the truth.
instead of basing decisions on your diet entirely from an emotional reaction, perhaps it’s best to determine your diet based on hard facts of nutritional value and environmental impact.
No, it wasn’t. Empirical data was fabricated. There was never evidence to support those claims, which is why we no longer believe them.
I’m not, I’m basing decisions on evidence. Fuck you for projecting your idiocy onto me.
Which includes eating meat instead of plants. But I personally do it because we know animals feel fear and pain, and we do not know that about plants.
Why are you fighting in favor of needless slaughter? Fucking psychopaths here.
you seem to be in an emotional hysteria right now. so it’s natural that someone would think that you’re basing all your information on emotional triggers because you are arguing in an unstable emotional state.
go outside and touch grass, you need the downtime.
we’ll all be here waiting for you to call us names again once you’ve calmed down.
Not if they know how to read. Evidence guides my choices, and then I get emotional because dumbfucks reject evidence so they can continue causing harm without guilt.
You should be angry, too.
why would I be angry?
I eat meat and veg. you eat only veg. we both live completely different lives with completely different requirements and completely different perspectives.
in my perspective, I eat meat because I eat meat not sure why that’s something to get so emotional about and call me a psychopath.
are you angry because you’re hungry?
I’m angry because you choose needless death and suffering, dipshit.
As I stated before: you’re inserting your own hubris of what consious means as if we agree.
I don’t agree with your definition of consciousness.
This means we cannot have an honest conversation on what that means as we already disagree with what consiousness means.
This does not mean I disagree plant based is valid on the other arguments. Just not this one.
As i said: it is unethical to even suggest it’s a matter of judgement on ethics as you’ve already down graded something in order just to be comfortable to judge someone else on their ethics. A complete discard of plants from the equation is egotistical of yourself to even go there.
you revealled you are already unequipped with ethics to be arguing ethics.
You are you’re own paradox of lack of ethics.
Removed by mod
No. I won’t shut up. You can calm down, grow up and disagree like an adult.
And all this so you can be judgy?
Find better goals in life.
You can go chill your heels on my block list troll.
Removed by mod
I’m judgy of people that believe in chemtrails, and HAARP, and juice cleanses to treat cancer, too.
There is an objective world we can learn things about. People that reject that with “have an open mind, man” don’t deserve respect and their opinions are worth absolutely nothing.
Removed by mod
you know this can’t be proven
You’re ignoring evidence as well as my other point: cutting meat from your diet results in fewer plants consumed.
so? that has nothing to do with whether plants can think
Removed by mod
you keep talking about things that have nothing to do with the veracity of what Ive said
you can’t prove such a claim
Removed by mod
read that study. it does not prove plants aren’t conscious. it casts doubt on the existing claims that they are.
in the conclusion, they explicitly allow for the possibility that it may be proven that plants are conscious.
Because a negative can’t be proven.
Because evidence does not support those claims.
Theists use this same fallacious logic to pretend it’s acceptable to worship bronze age death gods.
Let’s all use our brains, please.
so you seem to understand that what I said is true
good catch. also the end of this so-called study has a bunch of bunk too:
Data availability
Not applicable.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethics approval
Not applicable.
Consent to participate
All authors consent.
Code availability
Not applicable.
i cant imagine how this thing got printed. it looks like something rfk junior spat out.
All that is missing is working out topless in some blue jeans with raw milk in a hot tub and kid rock smaking himself in the face failing a mic drop.
Do they? Please provide a quote, I’m not seeing anything like that in the conclusion.
Here’s the other thing: even if you are correct (which is not likely based on evidence), consuming plants instead of meat still reduces suffering. Eating plants directly is more efficient than eating animals that eat plants.
this has nothing to do with what I e been saying at all, and I am correct, as you explained in your other comment
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
they’re allowing that it still could be proven, but objecting to the theories they showed in this paper
man what
Consciousness is very poorly understood, because we don’t understand brains very well at all.
However, because we don’t know how it works, it’s possible that every system with chemical reactions, moving parts etc, might be conscious. It’s a bit of a mind fuck.
Sure, for a generous definition of “possible”. However I don’t see how you get from there to “either all are, or all are not”.
Like, you could at some point have said we don’t understand magnetism. You couldn’t from that argue that either all metals are magnetic or none are.
that’s the thing: no one knows. No one agrees. Not even vegans. It doesn’t stop them pushing out misinformation about it.
For all the facts we do actually have and agree on i could make just as many claims that there is consciousness as they claim there isn’t.
Meanwhile you have anti abortion claims that life starts at conception. This makes an assumption of when consciousness starts. Still not fact.
And scientists don’t want to be withheld from work on plants for the fear of ethics. (Yet they tear mice apart)They will go as far as make no effort of reference or crosscheck even on the discussion of consciousness(even shows in the above link at the bottom of the study) like they know so little they can’t even begin with reference that was ever agreed upon and burry any that contradict their hubris while making an assumption on consciousness.
All three of these groups are in constant contradiction depending on comfort level of ethics around consciousness. It’s like a shitty ballet around a non fact.
Kudos man.
Vegans on the internet seem like a psy-op and full of trolls. The vegans I meet are rarely that fucking crazy.
The cost of meat has gotten so expensive over the past decade that they vegan/vegetarian alternative is so much cheaper. I’m not a vegan. I’m just not going to spend $40 for a chunk of steak.
Even at dinner parties, I make tofu/vegan stuff. I make chicken patties, spaghetti and meatballs, Asian stir fry… All using mock protein. I tell people and they’re convinced it’s good too.
It’s the same concept of people being assholes online, but applied to those belief structures. They are just taking the freedom that anonymity provides and acting like their true selves. They’re just too afraid to be such insufferable assholes in person because of the response they KNOW they would receive.
Im vegetarian and met some internet vegans and vegies irl. Theeey are not fun…
That’s not what I’m doing. I’m going from the ground up. Based on all available evidence, plants do not feel fear or pain. Again, they have no brains. This information guides my choices, following my goal to reduce suffering in the world.
You’re the one thinking backwards. I never said they were “less than,” only that they lack consciousness. You’re pretending we should feel guilty for eating things that cannot think.
If you feel that strongly about it, stop consuming anything.
Removed by mod
Holy shit, did you skip basic biology?
Kingdom phylum class species, do these words mean anything to you?
Jellyfish and starfish are animals, not plants. Not all things without brains are plants, but there are no plants with brains that we know of.
Jellyfish seemingly cannot feel pain and only have enough neurons to crudely sense their environment; I advocate against consuming any animals, but in terms of animal suffering it is probably less harmful to eat a jellyfish than a cow, chicken, pig, or even fish, which can feel pain.
My ethics include using scientifically acquired information to make the best choices we can. The fuck are you doing?
Removed by mod
One thing: I absolutely hate vegan branding. Some things, I want it to TASTE like meat (like mock pork, or vegan nuggets).
Other things, I would rather it taste like a vegan version of it. Like tofurkey is not at all comparable to regular turkey. And any meat eater hoping to switch is going to be pissed.
Like no, this is a whole different meal man. Don’t get it twisted.